Can the Truth Be Denied with Reasonable Doubt?

Chris Harris has been convicted of five first degree murder charges in the deaths of a family he claimed were his friends.  You can read more here:

http://www.ajc.com/ap/ap/crime/jurors-continue-deliberations-in-ill-5-dead-case/nX7zK/

In an earlier article, we examined statements by his defense attorney, Daniel Fultz, who claimed reasonable doubt existed in the case and theorizing the 14 year old son of the murdered family was caught in the middle of a killing frenzy by his client, who then killed the boy in self-defense.

Yet, the blood evidence and boy’s body indicated more than 50 blows with a tire iron, bringing into doubt any statement about “self-defense” from a grown man in the prime of his life who greatly outweighed the boy.

What did the defense attorney have to say about the fact the boy was so severely beaten he most likely could not move throughout most of his final ordeal in relation to his claim his client killed the boy in self-defense?

Daniel Fultz, defense attorney: “That fact that someone hit him repeatedly is problematic.  It can’t be denied.”

“Problematic” – for whom is the “fact” “problematic”?  For the defense attorney and his client since their “theory” doesn’t fit the facts of the case.

“That fact” – the word “that” indicates the defense attorney is uncomfortable with the “fact” and wishes to distance it from himself, probably because it causes him problems.  This is also a verbal attempt to minimize the “fact”, which does not agree with his stated theory.

“someone hit him” – We all know who “someone” is because even the defense’s theory places the tire iron in the defendant’s hand, who admitted to hitting the boy severely enough to kill him.

“It can’t be denied” – This is a true statement.  Unlike defense theories about reasonable doubt, facts cannot be “denied”.  This is the reason the “fact” is “problematic”.

What have we learned?

We have learned reasonable doubt does not hide the truth.